RESPONSE FROM SEN. CHERI JAHN
Just got this in my mailbox.
At least sounds like she is actually paying attention and thinking things through:
"
Dear Friends,
Thanks to all of you for taking the time to write to me about an emotionally charged issue, and please allow me to also say an even bigger thank you to the many constituents who have attended my town hall meetings this year. There are hundreds of bills that are coming through the legislative process this year and I am working hard to closely follow them all. I wish I could respond to each of you personally, but I have been receiving literally thousands of emails and phone calls about the firearm bills we are hearing in the Senate this week, and I wanted to reach out to as many of my constituents as possible before I vote. I will do my best to concisely address the concerns I have heard from you all, and I must say, I am truly thankful for the kind and respectful discourse we have been able to have.
I think it is important for citizens to know how I look at every piece of legislation that comes before me regardless of the issue. First of all, I always ask, what are we trying to fix? Is it a problem that the state (and I emphasize state here) government can resolve? Secondly, as you all know, the devil is in the details on any policy or legislation that is passed, so I look carefully to anticipate any unintended consequences. It is my job to look deeply and thoroughly and to talk with experts on each issue. I spend a lot of time researching and talking with people in my district. Finally, I painstakingly look to see how the policy can be enforced. If you can't enforce it, then we probably should not pass it.
I would like to share my thoughts and positions on the bills that I have looked at so far. Please keep in mind that at the time of this writing I have yet to hear debate on these bills as they have not come to any of the committees I serve on. First of all, the background fee bill, HB 13-1228; I currently support because I have been assured that the money collected will only be used to cover the cost of the background checks. I believe in the 2nd Amendment but do not see charging a $10.00 fee unreasonable or as a violation of that Constitutional right. The state previously charged a fee through in the 1990s until the federal government started paying for the checks. When the cost was returned to the state, the fees were not reinstated and now the cost is being subsidized by taxpayers.
HB13-1224, the magazine limitation bill, I cannot support. Again, my previous concerns about the enforceability of the law weigh on me quite heavily. There is no way to distinguish between who would own these magazines legally versus those who bought them illegally. I feel that this legislation would be punishing those citizens who bought them before the ban, or possibly inherited them, while at the same time allowing people to simply drive them across the border from another state. I always look for unintended consequences and I think this bill is flawed.
HB 13-1229, requiring universal background checks, is a bill that I find reasonable. I see nothing wrong with a person having to get a background check to obtain a firearm. I will be listening closely in debate to be sure that there are sufficient provisions for selling to family members and for things like collectibles and antiques.
HB 13-1226, the concealed carry on campus bill, is another one I cannot support. I have not heard of one incident that had to do with a law abiding citizen committing a harmful act that had a concealed carry permit. These are, after all, adults that have gone through the legal processes to carry a firearm.
SB 13-196 is the liability bill, and I am not supporting it. I would liken it to holding a car dealership liable for someone driving drunk and getting in an accident, and then saying that the dealership did not use 'reasonable' care when selling them the car. What constitutes reasonable care? I think this is very far reaching.
SB 13-195 is a actually just a cleanup bill that closes a loophole in the process to gain a concealed carry permit. Years ago when we began the process to legalize concealed carry licenses, the language of the bill didn’t include a provision for internet classes (because there was no such thing at the time). This bill simply requires that to earn a concealed carry permit, the applicant must attend the class in person, and cannot attend via the internet. This bill is a common sense approach to make concealed carry permit holders accountable to the required safety training, and I will be voting in support of it.
Again, I wanted to sincerely thank you for taking the time to contact my office. We have been inundated with thousands of calls and emails on both sides of the issues and I’m so pleased to have so many of my constituents making their voices heard. I also hope that you will stay involved with the process on other issues as we continue to look at legislation in other areas of state government. Feel free to contact me again anytime and we look forward to the great work we can do together.
Sincerely,
Senator Cheri Jahn
Senate District 20
(303) 866-4856"
Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums
Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by DHCO
